Quote:
Originally Posted by ChicagoChicago
Waterview and the Spire were not to be "sheathed in blue glass." At the very least they were original, which is a helluva lot more than I can say for anything LaGrange has ever done.
|
Well I'm pretty sure Chicago Spire was an all-glass design, and Waterview had substanstial glass to it as well, but my argument is not about nit-picky details. It's hard to call anyone entirely original anymore, because we live in an age where it seems as though anything goes and everything has been tried. Though I wasn't fond of Chicago Spire design in it's entirety, to its credit, it was an entirely original concept, and the fact that it was actually under construction gives me hope that there are those out there still willing to bank on daring designs. Unfortunately, that one didn't hold water. Another one will though. I try to stay positive and look at everything objectively.
That being said, I'm not a fan nor an enemy of LaGrange's Faux-arts architecture. It's his style, every architect has one and is entitled to one, the same way every forumer here is entitled to their opinion. While I'm rather indifferent to designs like this, they add density to the skyline and, as I said before, created a textured backdrop for the city of Chicago. I wouldn't want to live in a city full of perfect skyscrapers...that's not very interesting at all, is it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280
I think we've turned a corner from "throw up schlocky condo boxes" to "make calculated investments in high quality, long term, multifamily investments" which has resulted in more investment in the quality of the projects and subsequently the architecture.
|
Exactly what I mean, I never doubt that more great designs are around the corner...and with our new economic reality, anything that is proposed now is likely to have much more secure financial backing. At least, one can only hope heh